Komnas HAM: 7 Reasons Why UU Ormas Must Be Sued

Togog.Online |
The world of democracy and human rights expressed concern over the legalization of the Perppu Ormas into Law. It was said by Komnas HAM Commissioner Maneger Nasution through his release today, Wednesday (25/10).

According to him, the Perpmas of CSOs have the potential to become anti-democracy and human rights.

"It becomes an irony, because the Perppu Ormas was actually passed by democratic institutions, DPR RI In the perspective of human rights, the law denied the principles of state law, constitutionalism, and human rights," said Manejer.

Therefore, he said, true pro-democracy activists unite to sue the mass organizations law that has just been passed by the House.

Maneger mentions, there are at least seven reasons why UU Ormas deserve to be sued. Some of them are caused by arguments that appear to make the Act.

"The first reason, (related) procedural arguments, the birth of the Perppu does not meet the rules of interest that force, President Jokowi as head of state has never declared state in an emergency, whether martial law, martial law, or civil emergency," he said.

Next, Maneger mentions, is related to the argument of legal vacuum. The argument that says there is an inadequate legal vacuum or law is ridiculous.

According to him, Law no. 17/2003 on mass organizations is still sufficient to answer the question of honor.

"The three arguments for legal certainty, this view also does not have an adequate argument base, on the contrary, the newly passed House of Community Ordinance law gives more legal certainty," he explained.

In addition to these arguments, the law also considers eliminating the role of judges or courts. Unlike in Law no. 17/2013, the dissolution of mass organizations must go through a court decision after preceded by warnings and cessation of activities.

In this latest mass organization law, he said, the due process of law mechanism is eliminated. The government has the right to dissolve the organizations which, according to the subjective version of the government, are against the Pancasila.

"If you are not satisfied, please submit to the court as if the 'gebuk' first brought to the hospital, this clearly violates the principle of presumption of innocence," said Maneger.

He mentioned, the fifth reason is the excessive penalization. Government Org. 2/2017 it includes criminal sanctions with the penalty of life imprisonment or a prison term of at least five years and a maximum of 20 years.

In fact, he said, in the old Social Ordinance, there are no rules of criminal sanctions. There is only administrative sanctions. That's what he thinks is one of the weaknesses of the New Organization Law.

"The flaw of humanitarian reasoning, how is it that a law whose character is a state administration law regulates rights, but has a flavor of punishment law that endangers a cruel criminal element," he said.

The next reason, he said, the law has the potential to create an authoritarian regime. One of the weaknesses of the Act is the giving of authority to the government to subjectively decide and execute the mass organizations they call anti-Pancasila in one breath.

That, Maneger said, puts the government's power on control over the constitutional rights of citizens. The law, he argues, not only threatens a group that the government calls radical and intolerant, but also a critical group.

"This law can be used to civilize citizens who criticize the government under the pretext of 'anti' Pancasila, which threatens the future of Pancasila democracy, Indonesia has the potential to be delivered to the gate of authoritarianism," he explained.

The seventh reason, according to Maneger, is related to religious freedom. According to him, one of the most elementary rights of citizen's constitution is the right to freedom of religion. The newly-passed mass organization law on Tuesday (24/10) is potentially used by authorities on behalf of Pancasila to limit the right to freedom of religion of citizens.

"Excessive government control given this law has the potential to tarnish the sanctity of religion and injure the religious experience of the citizens," he said.

No comments